Case Name in Social Security Case - Unavailable

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------x
RASHEEN L. BUTTS,
Plaintiff,
-against-
FRANK BISIGNANO, COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,1
Defendant.
------------------------------------x
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
24-CV-8334 (EK)
ERIC KOMITEE, United States District Judge:
On July 29, 2025, the parties jointly moved for an
attorney’s fee award of $9,300 payable to Plaintiff’s counsel
under the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”). 	ECF No. 14.
The parties did not attach any time records and used multiple
hourly rates. 	Accordingly, the Court denied the motion without
prejudice. 	Docket Order dated August 5, 2025. 	Later that day,
the parties moved once again, correcting these errors. 	ECF No.
15. 	On August 12, in connection with the Court’s contemplation
of a modest reduction of attorney’s fees, the Court directed
Plaintiff’s counsel to submit a statement explaining any unusual
features or complexity of this case. 	Docket Order dated August
1 Frank Bisignano became the Commissioner of Social Security on May 7,
2025. 	Pursuant to Rule 25(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
Bisignano is substituted for Carolyn Colvin, former acting Commissioner of
Social Security, as the defendant in this suit. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (“Any
action instituted in accordance with this subsection shall survive
notwithstanding any change in the person occupying the office of Commissioner
of Social Security or any vacancy in such office.”).
Case 1:24-cv-08334-EK Document 17 Filed 11/19/25 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
12, 2025. 	On August 25 Plaintiff’s counsel so filed. 	ECF No.
16.
In Social Security disability cases, a district court
may “conclude that excessive or inadequate billing warrants some
reduction” in EAJA fees. Vincent v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 651
F.3d 299, 308 (2d Cir. 2011).2 	Given the record here, a ten-
percent reduction of EAJA fees — amounting to $930.00, for a net
award of $8,370.00 — is appropriate.
Plaintiff’s counsel expended nearly forty attorney
hours — significantly more than the mean and median for recent
fee applications to this Court — and despite the fact that the
administrative record here, at 1,001 pages, was meaningfully
shorter than average. 	The $9,300 fee request is the largest
amount billed in any social security case in which this Court
has presided, save for ones that raised sufficiently complicated
issues that the Court authorized page extensions to briefing.
Plaintiff’s counsel’s letter explains his approach to
social security disability cases generally, as well as billing
practices. 	See ECF No. 16. 	However, it does not identify any
special complexity that would justify the significant time spent
on this matter, including roughly thirty hours spent on the
supporting brief. 	See ECF No. 15-2. 	Here, “the facts and legal
2 Unless otherwise noted, when quoting judicial decisions this order
accepts all alterations and omits all citations, footnotes, and internal
quotation marks.
Case 1:24-cv-08334-EK Document 17 Filed 11/19/25 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>

3
issues in this case were not so novel or complex as to justify
the time requested for preparation of the supporting brief.”
Goff v. Astrue, No. 09-CV-1392, 2013 WL 12110399, at *3
(N.D.N.Y. Feb. 15, 2013) (reducing 24.3-hour request for time
spent writing social security brief by one-third).
Additionally, the parties jointly moved to remand, which
Plaintiff’s counsel might have sought before proceeding to the
multiple rounds of brief editing that he reports.
Finally, Plaintiff’s counsel engaged in block billing,
with no individual time entry spanning fewer than 6.3 hours.
ECF No. 15-2. 	While these entries include detail about
counsel’s tasks, block billing has “frustrated meaningful review
of the reasonableness of the claimed hours.” 	Hines v. City of
Albany, 613 F. App’x 52, 55 (2d Cir. 2015) (affirming 30%
reduction in attorney’s fees).
Case 1:24-cv-08334-EK Document 17 Filed 11/19/25 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>

4
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s counsel shall
be awarded $8,370.00 pursuant to the Equal Access to Justice
Act.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Eric Komitee
ERIC KOMITEE
United States District Judge
Dated: 	November 19, 2025
Brooklyn, New York
Case 1:24-cv-08334-EK Document 17 Filed 11/19/25 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:
<pageID>